To upgrade or not to upgrade??? (1 Viewer)

My husband and I have adequate optics - he has Opticron, I have Nikon Monarchs. We are thinking of upgrading and have been looking at Swarovski SLCs, the new Swarovision , Leicas and Zeiss. All cost about 4/5 times more than our current bins.... Now, is this just being snobs and wanting the best or do we really need them to enhance our viewing? And does our Nikon scope need upgrading to the rather nice Swarovski we tried out last week? Opinions and advice welcome!

If u have the money.... I would say yes on the scope... I have had two n will never be without.

From what I understand... Optics in binos have leveled the playing field a bit between high end and mid priced... Yr set up is solid in binos...

But a quality gap exists in scopes. You get what u pay for. An alpha scope is heads n shoulders above any mid to low priced scope. I know I was out shore birding for seabirds last oct. the lady next to me had a nice mid priced scope.... A 1000$ I would say easily but the view from my swaro was what we all looked thru. Clearly better by far....

seedyrom said:

My husband and I have adequate optics - he has Opticron, I have Nikon Monarchs. We are thinking of upgrading and have been looking at Swarovski SLCs, the new Swarovision , Leicas and Zeiss. All cost about 4/5 times more than our current bins.... Now, is this just being snobs and wanting the best or do we really need them to enhance our viewing? And does our Nikon scope need upgrading to the rather nice Swarovski we tried out last week? Opinions and advice welcome!

Click to expand...

My advice is to consider whether you are currently frustrated by your current equipment in use. Are there situations of distance, lighting, temperature, or habitat complexity where you find getting birds in view and identified to be frustrating? If so, the next question is whether a different binocular would overcome such problems, and if so, which ones and whether you want to spend the money to get them. If not, stick with what you've got and spend more time outdoors, traveling, or reading field guides.

Personally, I like having bins with wide field of view, that focus quickly and precisely at all temperatures, that show excellent detail and color in back-lit situations, and that hang flat against my chest. For me, only a few models from Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski and Leica can do all these things to my satisfaction.

--AP

Further info - we both wear glasses.
Roland has Opticron Verano 8x42
I have Nikon Monarch 8x42
Our scope is Nikon EDIIIA with a 20-60 zoom eyepiece. Eye-relief is a problem.
We both find that we cannot see fine detail when looking at birds - don't know if that's an eye-sight thing or bin thing. We do have our eyes tested once a year so do have the correct prescriptions.
If we decide to upgrade, how do you actually decide what make is best?????
Decisions, decisions....

If you both just suffer from common myopia and/or mild astigmatism you might try using your scope without glasses. Some incovenience yes, but with easy workarounds. FWIW, even the worst modern optic is generally capable of resolving more detail than best human vision can see. So the only solution to see more detail is either to use more magnification or to get closer. Superior fieldcraft trumps superior optics in practice and generally costs nothing!

My primary binoculars (Zeiss) and scope (Swarovski) are now both five years old and out of date. But they still blow away anything in the mid-range I've seen in terms of brightness and sharpness--including some more recent models. I'm very happy I bought the best available when I did and could.

I tried to bird with my glasses on this winter to eliminate that half-second of fumbling. Didn't work out: I went back to pushing them up with the eyepieces as I raised the binoculars. Better view. Never use my glasses to look through a scope, since speed isn't an issue. My vision problem was hyperopia OS and now is simply old age as well.

So I would encourage you to go for the best you can now, and spend the rest of your lives on the stalking.

Seedyrom - Once you go on the quest for the Holy Grail, you will never stop seeking what the advertising spin doctors have to say about their alphas. A number of the folks who frequent this web site are so mesmerized by all the cant, that they are like the truly beautiful woman who frets at the mirror over the tiny little mole only she can see. When the alphas are asking over $2,000 for their latest creations, mid price by definition means around a $1,000. For that you can purchase a really superior binocular with lifetime guarantees.

For half that you can purchase one of Nikon's SE and EII used models which are optically equal to anything made. But if you are basically insecure (which is what snobbery is all about) then by all means spend the amount the dealers are asking (which is about a 40 % mark up) because they have to live, too. And you will enjoy what ever you choose.

But after a while the clever people will gin up another wizz bang whatever and sell them like hot cakes, promising you the best. I have a childhood friend who drives a Jaguar and rhapsodizes over his choice. I drive a 17 year old Saab 9000 with 261,000 miles on it. Doesn't burn oil, gets 30 mph, and handles like new.

In today's market it is difficult to make a bad choice. Best advice I can give you. Test a number of models and go with the one that you like, outdoors, regardless of price. That simple.

John

seedyrom said:

Further info - we both wear glasses.
Roland has Opticron Verano 8x42
I have Nikon Monarch 8x42
Our scope is Nikon EDIIIA with a 20-60 zoom eyepiece. Eye-relief is a problem.
We both find that we cannot see fine detail when looking at birds - don't know if that's an eye-sight thing or bin thing. We do have our eyes tested once a year so do have the correct prescriptions.
If we decide to upgrade, how do you actually decide what make is best?????
Decisions, decisions....

Click to expand...

I would have thought your Nikon scope is worth keeping, I still have my ED11, although I prefer the 30x eyepiece to the zoom (personal preference).
I am short sighted but wear contact lenses, many years ago when I wore spectacles I also pushed them up to look through my optics.

I don't know how old you are but remember the size of your pupils decrease with age. Your optician will be able to easily tell what yours are. In my case I do not benefit from binoculars with exit pupils greater than 4mm. Hence my default binocular is 8x32 although I have some Zeiss 7x42BGTPs.
You ultimately have to decide on your budget and "image". There is much discussion on the various threads to make choice very difficult, good luck!
In your situation I would upgrade my binoculars before the telescope.

I stand by my advice.
When I birded with Zeiss 7x42 BGATs I was told they were the best in the world. They may have been; they were better than anything else I'd seen. When they were stolen and I had to replace them with a 7x42 Victory (because the BGAT was no longer made), the new binocular was HEAD AND SHOULDERS above the Classic in brightness, fov, and sharpness (center and to the edge). Why should progress in optical engineering have stopped this year?
I quote one of my favorite writers: "Buy the best you can afford, and buy them as soon as you can."
All you need to do is look and see. If you can tell the difference, buy. If not, persevere.

"Buy the best you can afford" may be good advice, however from the various threads on this website there is much debate about what is "best".
Look and see is good advice and you are probably aware that the RSPB reserve at Leighton Moss has monthly optic events, where you can try lots of models to your hearts content without being pressured to buy.Martin Mere is also near to you with an In-Focus store but remember they dont sell Leica.
On a personal note I compared my Nikon 8x32 HGs against the 8x32 EDGs and couldn't jusify the changing. On the other hand the 10x42 EDG were noticibly better than my old Zeiss 10x40s. Waiting to see what the new Zeiss's models will be like.
There is a strong lesson from "the law of diminishing returns".

Why change, use the money you would have wasted on new optics and go for a birding holiday with it instead. Far better for you!!

Geoff Brown said:

Why change, use the money you would have wasted on new optics and go for a birding holiday with it instead. Far better for you!!

Click to expand...

Agree with Geoff. I use an Opticron ES80 scope. Twice now I have had a swarovski owner look though and comment how clear it is. I then struggled to see through theirs. That might be down to me preferring a 30x wide angle eyepiece rather than their zoom.

A better eye piece with more eye relief than your current zoom would restore the field performance you are currently not getting from your Nikon scope.
There is considerable input on the alternative options on the Spotting Scope forum section, but be aware that good eye pieces cost a solid chunk.

Re the binoculars, you might want to try the Canon IS image stabilized bins.
They come in various sizes up to 18x50, but also including handy 10x30 and 12x36 models, plus the brick like but optically superb 10x42.
You will certainly enjoy seeing the bird more when the image just floats in your view, rather than jittering.

seedyrom said:

Our scope is Nikon EDIIIA with a 20-60 zoom eyepiece. Eye-relief is a problem.
We both find that we cannot see fine detail when looking at birds - don't know if that's an eye-sight thing or bin thing.

Click to expand...

Three thoughts:
Do you use the scope at powers above 30x very often (I don't). If not, or even if you do, get the 24x WA (or DS) or 30x WA eyepiece. Either are a joy to use with glasses.

Better optics can help with seeing. It is true that modern optics generally resolve better than the eye, but the cleaner color, better contrast, brightness, and easy view of the best bins makes for better viewing by delivering more detail and not making the eyes and brain work so hard.

I don't know how experienced a birder you are, but if you feel you can't see details because you are birding in the company of others who report things that you can't see, the issue might not be optics or eyes but rather brain training. The better you know the birds, the more you know to look for, the more experience you ave with how certain features look relative to others according to condition, the more you can see.

--AP

Bob Philpott said:

Agree with Geoff. I use an Opticron ES80 scope. Twice now I have had a swarovski owner look though and comment how clear it is. I then struggled to see through theirs. That might be down to me preferring a 30x wide angle eyepiece rather than their zoom.

Click to expand...

Perhaps...but maybe out of kindness...frankly I have been next to all sorts of scopers and with my Swaro, unless I am around another person who has an Alpha scope, there simply is no comparison.

Unless you are digiscoping ....a scope is used for long distance which means light and clarity lack in just about any lesser scope when comparison to the alphas. It isn't just me who says that for there have been countless scope reviews that show truth in that. Doesn't mean that you can't see and ID birds with a lesser quality scope, but when push comes to shove, the Alpha will pick up the colors, contrast...etc... while the lesser scopes will not. This is especially true at a distance as in sea birding, shore birds etc...

seedyrom said:

My husband and I have adequate optics - he has Opticron, I have Nikon Monarchs. We are thinking of upgrading and have been looking at Swarovski SLCs, the new Swarovision , Leicas and Zeiss. All cost about 4/5 times more than our current bins.... Now, is this just being snobs and wanting the best or do we really need them to enhance our viewing? And does our Nikon scope need upgrading to the rather nice Swarovski we tried out last week? Opinions and advice welcome!

Click to expand...

Reasons to upgrade to "the top":
You enjoy your hobby, and if you're looking at birds, you might as well get the brightest, clearest views you can.
You've worked hard and deserve to get what you like.
Top-end equipment is cheaper comparatively than it was a few decades ago.
Binoculars and Scopes are products of great beauty and utility, and many find them as interesting as birds.
The views through top-end equipment are stunning and will make you forget you ever had....lesser equipment.
We're not on this planet for long, you never know what's around the corner, and money in the bank depreciates and does little for you.
Good equipment will last for decades, and most comes with excellent warranties.
Only inverted snobs criticise those who enjoy their top-end equipment.

Reasons not to upgrade:
You enjoy your hobby as it is, and you probably won't see more birds with more expensive equipment.
You've worked hard and don't want to waste the fruits of your labour on frivolities.
Top-end equipment is outrageously priced.
Binoculars and Scopes are simply binoculars and scopes, and many experienced birders happily use old mouldy models held together with sticky-tape.
The views through top-end equipment are only marginally better than those through many mid-priced models.
We're living in tough times, you never know what's around the corner, and money in the bank is comforting.
Good equipment might end up getting stolen or damaged, may as well stick with cheaper models, some of which have excellent warranties.
Top-end equipment is for optics-snobs.

Ultimately, only you can decide, based on what what you want, how much you enjoy your hobby, how much you wish to spend, and how long you intend to use them. FWIW, I have opted to eventually buy the best equipment I can afford, and have wasted inordinate amounts of time and money getting there. I would have saved money by simply buying top-end stuff to start out with. I have Swaro SV's, Leica FL's, Canon IS, Leica Ultravid and Swaro and Nikon ED50 scopes. Sometimes I'm wracked with guilt over the excessive over-indulgence, but mostly I enjoy my binos and scopes, and if I were to keep only one of each, it would be the Swaros in both cases. I recommend you get along to In-Focus and try as many models as you can, then leave it a few days, go back and try them again, and buy whatever model you like best, irrespective of the price (as long as you have the cash to spare). Then don't ever look at an optics thread or review again! Best of Luck, tell us what you decide, and don't forget to check used equipment on the classifieds section here, or from the major dealers in the UK.

Thank you all for your comments so far!
I have tried the Swarovski 8.5x42 Swarovision bins and the 8x42 HDSLC and was blown away with the difference between those and my Nikons. It could be that there is something equally as good and less expensive (Zeiss?) it is difficult finding somewhere that sells (and has in stock) the range of bins we would like to compare. Also, in the High Street or a shopping centre is not the best place to compare them! We will persevere in our testing as it is important to get it right. if we upgrade (and we probably will) it will be important to get it right as these bins will be forever! The scope is another matter - the one we have is good and there was not the same mind-blowing difference when comparing it with the Swarovski that there was with the bins. Roland tried it out without his glasses today and found he could see better but I can't.

Sancho, you should post that list as a "sticky"!!!

If you're able to get down to London, In-Focus at Barnes (WWT) has a wide range in stock, and you can apparently test them over the reserve. I've never been, but have bought from them online, and their service is excellent. I'm sure there are other stores based at reserves throughout the UK where you can test equipment in "field" conditions.

Hi, Sancho

Thanks for your comments - list much appreciated.

We have been to In Focus at Martin Mere but they didn't have any Swarovskis in stock. I did try some Nikon EDG but they were very heavy. We will try to get up to Leighton Moss next month as they are having an optics event but we don't know what makes will be there yet. Not rushing because need to get this right. Have to last forever!